[2019] KEHC 32 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 32 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had only served 7 days of the 6-month imprisonment term imposed for the serious offence of manufacturing and possessing Chang'aa. The sentence was deemed lawful and lenient, and the plea was unequivocal. The court held that there was no basis for revision at this early stage and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 32 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Charles Opondo; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Siaya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Revision 114 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Outcome
application declined
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Sentencing Revision, Manufacture of Illicit Liquor, Possession of Illicit Liquor
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Revision Manufacture of Illicit Liquor Possession of Illicit Liquor

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Opondo

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to revision of sentence after serving only 7 days of a 6-month imprisonment term for manufacturing and possessing Chang'aa.
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful and appropriate given the seriousness of the offence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had only served 7 days of the 6-month imprisonment term imposed for the serious offence of manufacturing and possessing Chang'aa. The sentence was deemed lawful and lenient, and the plea was unequivocal. The court held that there was no basis for revision at this early stage and advised the applicant to file a fresh request after serving at least one month in prison if he wished to pursue revision on merit.

Court Disposition

application declined

Orders

  • The request for revision is rejected as premature.
  • The applicant may file a fresh request after serving at least one month in prison.